ctown28
Sophomore
@ctown28
Posts: 507
Likes: 391
 
|
Post by ctown28 on Dec 20, 2017 16:16:05 GMT
NONE OF THOSE 21 SCIENTISTS WERE WILLING TO COME FORWARD AND TESTIFY AT THE ARBITRATION HEARING AND SUBJECT THEIR ANALYSIS TO THE SCRUTINY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION. Actually, they were. It was the NFL who didn't want to be subjected to the embarrassment of the unanimous testimony of 21 scientists. That would have entailed endless hours of repetitive damning testimony against the Wells Report. The NFL got what they wanted. A brief was filed instead. A brief that contained this graph, illustrating the idiocy of Deflategate. The football pressure from every outdoor game since 1960. The NFL permissible pressure range is in red. There is a reason the NFL refused to release their own pressure measurements. This is it.  DC Fan just got owned! |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 21, 2017 7:51:35 GMT
Actually, they were. It was the NFL who didn't want to be subjected to the embarrassment of the unanimous testimony of 21 scientists. That would have entailed endless hours of repetitive damning testimony against the Wells Report. The NFL got what they wanted. A brief was filed instead. A brief that contained this graph, illustrating the idiocy of Deflategate. The football pressure from every outdoor game since 1960. The NFL permissible pressure range is in red. There is a reason the NFL refused to release their own pressure measurements. This is it. DC Fan just got owned! Nope. I owned King Kong Shady.
A brief? LOL!!! A brief isn't valid evidence because a brief cant' be cross-examined.
If you're charged with a crime and you say you have a witness who will give you an alibi and your witness won't come forward and testify but only provides a written statement, then guess what? You don't have an alibi. Because if your witness wont' come forward and testify and subject his testimony to the scrutiny of cross-examination, then anything your witness says is inadmissible and invalid and irrelevant.
Same with those 21 scientists (many of whom were on Robert Kraft's payroll). None of them were willing to come forward and testify at the Arbitration hearing and give the NFL's attorneys a chance to cross-examine them. Why was that? Because they all knew their analysis wouldn't hold up under the scrutiny of cross-examination so they were scared shitless to come forward and testify and subject their analysis to cross-examination. So none of their analysis is valid or relevant.
But you know who did come forward to testify at the Arbitration hearing and give the opposing side a chance to cross-examine his analysis? That's right, Professor Marlowe. Because Professor Marlowe knew his analysis was accurate and unimpeachable. And it was. Brady's lawyers tried their best to shake Professor Marlow's analysis, but they failed.
So in the end, we have 1 expert who came forward and testified that the deflation in the footballs couldn't have been caused by weather alone and had to be caused by a combination of weather AND human tampering and we have ZERO, let me repeat, ZERO experts who came forward to testify the opposite.
Bottom line: Brady was guilty of cheating.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2017 9:13:34 GMT
www.si.com/nfl/2016/10/04/tom-brady-deflategate-ideal-gas-lawWe could do this all day. You can pretend the calls were wrong even though they weren't; you can keep hating the Patriots and posting bullshit; I really don't care. If you actually bothered reading the NY Times article I posted you'd see how it details the conspiracy against the Patriots in the league office, instead of just posting anti-Patriots links. But I suppose it's easier to pretend the Patriots are somehow getting help from the league office if you don't know the facts. Just know that you and DC Fan are on one side and reality is on the other. 1st, the calls were wrong. 2nd, the opinions of those 21 scientists are IRRELEVANT because NONE OF THOSE 21 SCIENTISTS WERE WILLING TO COME FORWARD AND TESTIFY AT THE ARBITRATION HEARING AND SUBJECT THEIR ANALYSIS TO THE SCRUTINY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION.
If you're charged with a crime and you say you have an witness who can give you an alibi for the crime but that witness isn't willing to come forward and testify in court, GUESS WHAT: YOU DON'T HAVE AN ALIBI BECAUSE YOU'RE WITNESS WASN'T WILLING TO TESTIFY AND SUBJECT HIS TESTIMONY TO THE SCRUTINY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION. SAME WITH THOSE 21 SCIENTISTS. THEY WEREN'T WILLING TO COME FORWARD AND TESTFIFY AT THE ARBITRATION HEARING AND SUBJECT THEIR ANALYSIS TO THE SCRUTINY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION SO THEY'RE OPINIONS ARE INVALID AND IRRELEVANT.
Bottom line: Ted Wells was right. Brady was guilty of cheating.
Did a hacker take possession of DC-Fan's account? I had never seen him making gross grammar mistakes before... and testfify is the covfefe way to say it now? LOL |
|
|
|
Post by shadyvsesham on Dec 21, 2017 14:19:42 GMT
Sigh, DC_Fan, make a NE thread, and that's all he knows. Troll will be a troll.
According to the rules it isnt a catch, and it's bs folks. Sadly, this is how things are. Do I think Dez/James are catches, I do, but instead of complaining, we need to fix this rule, because it's nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Dec 21, 2017 15:26:54 GMT
So in the end, we have 1 expert who came forward and testified Sorry, cupcake. The validity of science is not determined in a court room. Never has, never will. Please try again. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Dec 21, 2017 15:41:40 GMT
Sigh, DC_Fan, make a NE thread, and that's all he knows. Troll will be a troll. According to the rules it isnt a catch, and it's bs folks. Sadly, this is how things are. Do I think Dez/James are catches, I do, but instead of complaining, we need to fix this rule, because it's nonsense. There's a reason I have him on ignore. |
|
|
|
Post by shadyvsesham on Dec 21, 2017 19:18:54 GMT
Sigh, DC_Fan, make a NE thread, and that's all he knows. Troll will be a troll. According to the rules it isnt a catch, and it's bs folks. Sadly, this is how things are. Do I think Dez/James are catches, I do, but instead of complaining, we need to fix this rule, because it's nonsense. There's a reason I have him on ignore. I admit, I hate ignoring but Im getting to the point it might be for the best. Ive seen him be wrong so many times, and he is like that kid who goes,'NAH UH IM RIGHT!" When a poster can literally tell you how he will rank marvel/DC movies even before he's seen them (And he was right) the kid is a two trick pony. (I love DC > Marvel and ewwww Brady is a poopy head!) |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Dec 21, 2017 20:10:08 GMT
There's a reason I have him on ignore. I admit, I hate ignoring but Im getting to the point it might be for the best. Ive seen him be wrong so many times, and he is like that kid who goes,'NAH UH IM RIGHT!" When a poster can literally tell you how he will rank marvel/DC movies even before he's seen them (And he was right) the kid is a two trick pony. (I love DC > Marvel and ewwww Brady is a poopy head!) I only have two people on ignore, they're people that have absolutely nothing to contribute and just muck up the boards with their constant babbling. He's a troll and a proven liar and fraud. I don't understand why anyone talks to him anymore. His shtick isn't even funny, it's tedious. |
|
|
|
Post by shadyvsesham on Dec 21, 2017 21:42:57 GMT
I admit, I hate ignoring but Im getting to the point it might be for the best. Ive seen him be wrong so many times, and he is like that kid who goes,'NAH UH IM RIGHT!" When a poster can literally tell you how he will rank marvel/DC movies even before he's seen them (And he was right) the kid is a two trick pony. (I love DC > Marvel and ewwww Brady is a poopy head!) I only have two people on ignore, they're people that have absolutely nothing to contribute and just muck up the boards with their constant babbling. He's a troll and a proven liar and fraud. I don't understand why anyone talks to him anymore. His shtick isn't even funny, it's tedious. Youre 150 percent right. |
|
